If you wanted to rig your enemies election...

If you were a world leader and wanted to rig your enemies election which of the following would be desirable outcomes?

Winner losing the popular vote

Increase divides within the country

Increase debt on nonproductive assets

Reduce innovation

Reduce environmental protections

Increase wealth disparity

Weaken energy infrastructure

Build distrust in the political process

Isolate the country from its Allies

Decrease chance of new alliances

Decrease national defence capability short term.

Decrease national defence capability long term.

Which of the above seems desirable and what else would you want to do?

EDIT: we are into page 3 and still no one has suggested something else a rigger would want nor have they attempted to refute anything I said. Come on people I doubt my list was perfect on the First attempt.

I want suggestions people!!!!! ( And no they don't have to be displayed by the current admin).

Right but shouldnt you at least require yourself to produce a theoretical mechanism for how it could happen before you start insinuating that it did?

Click to expand...

I don't see why?

First step is what you want, how comes second.

Besides just because it bears alot of hallmarks from the most recent American election doesn't mean it's only about that.

Even in my list I included "Decrease national defence capability short term" I don't think that applies at all to trumps actions.
Long term yes due to unsustainability but short term he is increasing funding. Maybe you could argue he is due to lack of oversight/accountability but I wouldn't.

Right but shouldnt you at least require yourself to produce a theoretical mechanism for how it could happen before you start insinuating that it did?

Click to expand...

Rig is the wrong word, attempted to influence it and have continued to try to sow and add jet fuel to discord among Americans with differing political ideologies, of course they do that, mainstream republicans including GW Bush have said this unequivocally. Look at the news that came out over the weekend in the NYT of how their intelligence community tried to frame the US intelligence community as trying to get dirt on Trump, and how Trump took the bait and totally mischaracterized the story (per the author of the story) to add to his victim narrative. I truly hope that Trump is just being naive in his attempts to keep his head about water, that the Russians are just fucking with the US intelligence community, and this isn't part of some quid pro quo.

Rig is the wrong word, attempted to influence it and have continued to try to sow and add jet fuel to discord among Americans with differing political ideologies, of course they do that, mainstream republicans including GW Bush have said this unequivocally. Look at the news that came out over the weekend in the NYT of how their intelligence community tried to frame the US intelligence community as trying to get dirt on Trump, and how Trump took the bait and totally mischaracterized the story (per the author of the story) to add to his victim narrative. I truly hope that Trump is just being naive in his attempts to keep his head about water, that the Russians are just fucking with the US intelligence community, and this isn't part of some quid pro quo.

Click to expand...

Yeah I don't believe any of that outside of Russians offering their political opinions.

I see the discord coming from our own media, intelligence agencies, and loony leftists. Russia isn't even close to being a factor.

The single biggest culprit of this has to be Israel and I assume the primary motive is to co-opt US foreign policy or at least steer it into favorable actions.

I don't think it is the same as 'rigging' though, rather using internal influences/pressure/lobbying/funding and it also applies to whoever gets elected regardless. I'm sure there are preferred winners but it isn't a make or break thing. The pressure is applied no matter what.

The single biggest culprit of this has to be Israel and I assume the primary motive is to co-opt US foreign policy or at least steer it into favorable actions.

I don't think it is the same as 'rigging' though, rather using internal influences/pressure/lobbying/funding and it also applies to whoever gets elected regardless. I'm sure there are preferred winners but it isn't a make or break thing. The pressure is applied no matter what.

Click to expand...

You don't see the divide in this country as being the result of differing values and world views but target something engineered by Israel?

I know like, who cares what a majority of people in a democracy think?

Click to expand...

The can be applied to just about anything. What if a majority of a people in a democracy have a problem with something like alternative lifestyles or abortions or something else you may support? Does it even have to be groups of a national size? What it's just the majority of a state, a city, a town, a neighborhood?

The can be applied to just about anything. What if a majority of a people in a democracy have a problem with something like alternative lifestyles or abortions or something else you may support? Does it even have to be groups of a national size? What it's just the majority of a state, a city, a town, a neighborhood?

Click to expand...

Well, as it turns out, a majority of people agree with me on those issues.

Well, as it turns out, a majority of people agree with me on those issues.

Click to expand...

Once again, if a nation, state, city or town hold a majority opinion that you don't agree with do you just accept it, ignore it or campaign/fight against it. Or, do you decide that your opinion is the correct one and enact laws, ordinances or policies that follow your ideals despite what the majority thinks if you have the power to do so?

Is it the correct choice to impose a national policy on a state, city or town who's majority doesn't agree with that policy? We see that now to a degree in Sanctuary states and their stance regarding immigration policy.

What about pro-trans policies? If a majority of a state, city or town disagrees with a pro-trans policy like the bathroom issue that had/has people in a twist, is it right to push it on them?

It's the classic many vs the few. Who decides? What is fair? How much of a pyramid is Democracy? Is Democracy just about numbers, because if so then it's really just mob rule after all.